Re: Adding optional<T&> find like method to associative containers in boost.

From: Janko Dedic (jankodedic2_at_[hidden])
Date: 2024-12-16 11:56:54

On Mon, Dec 16, 2024 at 12:41 PM Andrey Semashev via Boost <
boost_at_[hidden]> wrote:

> Another downside is that as soon as you choose boost::optional as a
> return value, proponents of std types everywhere will complain that the
> new interface doesn't compose well in their code bases. You couldn't
> choose std::optional as it doesn't support references (yet?), but if it
> did at some point, it would mean requiring a very recent C++ version,
> which will be a regression in compatibility for the existing Boost
> libraries. It would also exacerbate the boost::optional vs.
> std::optional argument.

What is the point of vocabulary types like optional, variant and span if
you cannot use them in library interfaces? Boost is "not std" and std is
"too new", so is the solution to just give up? IMO Boost libraries should
just use Boost vocabulary types, and those should have some convenience
functions to interoperate with std types.